Countering Disarmament Techniques

[Spectre]

It's hard to really address the question with so many variables. Regardless of strength vs strength, the energy equation (towards/away/vertical/etc), single or double grab, one thing I have found to be true:

fixating on the weapon, as opposed to the assailant, is a losing proposition. When doing knife on knife training, it often confuses the heck out of an opponent when you punch the crap out of them. Why? Because they imagine you "have" to use your weapon. Likewise, fixating too much on your PDF and ignoring your other options can be detrimental to life and limb. If a double-handed grab, perhaps you (the lawful user) can utilize your free hand in an eye, throat, or groin strike. If a single-handed grab, it should be much easier for the defender to use body mechanics to give the distance to use the arm.

This is really a dangerous topic, in which a little knowledge is a very dangerous thing. Qualified instruction is highly recommended. I can find good teaching for anyone in GA who wants to contact me.

[heisenberg]

Mr. Hayes, what Lindell retention technique did this person use to prevent the grab by the attacker? There is no question that Lindell is heavily diagnostic. That some people can make it work despite that is not in dispute. The issue is that diagnostic systems are heavily prone to failure under stress. That is a proven fact, both from research and operation. What other systems have you examined in detail?

Do you teach different methods to recover from a stovepipe, feed failure, unseated mag, etc? Or do you teach TAP-RACK? Frankly, I find it faint praise to tout Lindell simply because you are not aware of anything better (which is also different from stating that "there is nothing better"). The challenge is to make it better. And the diagnostic aspect of the system just begs to get fixed. Lindell has been around for 20 years. Seems like fixes are way overdue. Facile excuses that "life ain't simple" are unconvincing.

WH

[Marty Hayes]

The technique was a pin and spin, it was an attack to the holstered gun.
To anser your other quesitons...

In addition to being a certified LIndell instructor, am also a certified Monadnock defensive tactics instructor. I have also been involved in police defensive tactics as a practitioner for over 20 years. I have seen many different retention training techniques taught in these years, and with the exception of the Lindell, they are all strength intensive, which is fine if you are a strong male, but if you are not, your techniques based on strength/fighting skill will or can also fail you. I agree that the Lindell system should be simpler, and we have strived to make it so here at FAS.

If I was purely interested in learning retention techniques for myself, I might go with a strength intensive system, since I am 6'3", over 250 pounds. But, since we feel that someone 5'/100 pounds also has the right to defend him/herself, we teach the system that can and does work for these students as well.

Other reasons for teaching the LIndell system is that if I ever have to defend my teaching credentials and/or the techniques I teach, I have 25 years of experience to draw from, (the instructor/trainers for Lindell). One would be hard pressed to do better.

Please understand that I view the discipline from the aspect of a police trainer. I need to be able to justify what I teach to people. NOt all trainers that invent their own system care about doing so, nor can they back up the methods they teach by years of experience and successful street applications.

As far as what we teach in clearing malfunctions, it is first tap rack, if that doesn't clear it, go into lock, rip, cycle, seat, rack and assess. If that doesn't work, go to back-up weapon, or whatever else you need to do to survive.

Occasionally we teach an advanced weapons retention and disarming course. One of the drills is to blindfold the student, and have people attack the drawn and holstered gun. This is the best way I have found to test yourself to determine if you have learned the skills. If I were to certify instructors, this would be a mandatory test.

I know that when I demonstrate the drill, it takes me about a half second to assess what technique to execute. This doesn't seem unreasonable given the outcome of retaining your handgun, being able to create distance and re-assess the situation. I think it beats the hell out of getting into a physical duel with the adversary, where the strongest man wins.

[heisenberg]

Mr. Hayes, your goals to find/use an operationally successful, court defensible system are laudable. The problem is that you run into a chicken vs. egg situation. A new system may not have the specific operational history that you seem to seek, nor the court defensibility of decades of specific law enforcement instructor background. Makes it very hard to advance the field.

What is operationally successful? Does it require street data? How about if the "proof is the DT equivalent of Simunitions, where you run a new technique/system against hundreds of students, martial artists, and trainers? What instructor history meets your criteria? If a system or instructor isn't certified by some state training agency, does that rule out the system? If so, that seems to leave the decision on cutting edge training to ossified bureaucrats.

Yet there are many martial arts that are 1) not strength based and 2) have been adapted for various LE/self-defense applications. Lindell himself is a judoka and drew from his martial arts experience. The martial arts themselves also have a long instructor history. Tokyo Metro Police use Yoshinkan Aikido. And one can cite many martial techniques used in LE DT training.

"Pin and spin" is straight from Aikido. You should note, however, that even highly ranked Aikido black belts will state that even they can't make a lock work all the time and that sometimes you have to hit the guy first. That's why Aikido includes atemi.

I am unfamiliar with the attempted gun grab scenario that you cited. Yes, it is good that the officer retained his gun. But he used a technique that is applied when the opponent is basically already on the holstered weapon. Why not use a "retention" method that keeps the grabber from getting the weapon in the first place?

The point here is that the ends don't always justify the means. A damaged knee is better than losing your gun and getting shot with it, but it is still a damaged knee. If this had been a multiple attacker scenario, a damaged knee can make it hard to fight back effectively.

Finally, I frankly don't find your half second delay in figuring out which Lindell method to use comforting. You are a Lindell instructor with presumably many years of training, plus regular refresher training simply from teaching the skills. The classroom is also a BEST CASE situation. I doubt that your stress level, confusion level, etc approaches a real grab attempt on the street. In the gym, you know that you are running a handgun retention and disarming class and you know that you are about to defend against a grab. And yet, you still have a delay in mentally processing what to do. I think that if you look at accident reconstruction, you'll see that the usual quarter second human reaction time often expands to SECONDS, because of mental processing delays. I suspect that your half second delay can expand similarly, especially when it comes to lesser trained people, which I think is more realistic.

Do you have current data on the most commonly used Lindell methods to prevent grabs? As I stated before, the last data I recall from my faulty memory is that lower forearm block was the number one technique, which again doesn't impress me as indicating that the system is more street proven than something else. There are probably 10-20 moves in the Lindell system, just as a seat of the pants estimate. Which have been used on the street and at what frequency? That information would be far more telling in terms of being street proven. I'd like to know, for example, if anyone has ever used submarine. That technique seems rather ridiculous to me. it compromises your hold on the gun as you rotate the muzzle vertically up, and it puts the muzzle vertically up. It is just asking for a Rule 2 violation, the backstop being your face. Why not use any one of the many martial arts wrist releases instead? You can retain a full firing grip and keep the gun pointed where it belongs -- on the suspect.

Don't get me wrong. I think Lindell, as a standalone system, is reasonably workable. But it has a lot of flaws (too diagnostic, poor integration with firearms, poor integration with DT) which haven't seemed to have been addressed since the system's inception.

I also appreciate your informative replies. Thank you.

WH

[Marty Hayes]

Heisenberg:

You have done a good job of detailing the faults and/or theorizing about the falibility of the LIndell system, but I have not yet seen you propose a better system. Remember, my criteria is a 100 LB woman can retain her gun against a 250 LB attacker.

My half second delay that I refer to is in training and blindfolded. I have never had to use a Lindell method on the street, so do not know what the time delay would be, if any. If I saw the attack coming, there is a good chance I would not have a delay at all, or the flip side is there would be a longer delay. But, if it were a half-second delay to assess the attack and decide on a response, I do not think that out of line, as long as the weapon is secure in the holster or in my hand. And, when I mean a delay, I refer to the position/release action, not the action of securing the firearm.

I do not have current statistics on what techniques are being used on the street. Perhaps the fact that there are thousands of Lindell trained practitioners not getting thier guns grabbed says something too. Is it the confidence these people exude that allows them to be skipped when the victim selection process is taking place? I believe that may be true. If a 100 LBer finds she cannot prevail using a destructive technique, but can prevail, but with the faults outlined by you via the Lindell method, is she better off knowing that she could succeed with training A, or not succeed with training B?

And, the fact that the training occurs in a false environment, (the dojo/gym/training room) holds true for ALL training. If one is taught a destructive technique, but is not allowed to be attacked at full strength or power in training, and not allowed to execute the technique at full speed and power, how do you know it REALLY works on the street?

Lastly, we have given up on teaching the "submarine" technique because of it's faults.

[heisenberg]

Mr. Hayes, you seem to believe that I support what you call "destructive" techniques for weapon retention. I assume that you mean strike/strength based methods vs. Aikido/mechanical leverage methods. Not sure where you got that idea from. I do believe that strikes and mechanical leverage releases/disarms are synergistic. But that is different from depending upon strikes for the releases/disarms. Strikes also help to dissuade a re-attack. With some of the Lindell moves, the two parties end up the way they were before the grab attempt -- perhaps
ready to go at it again. Sure maybe you can shoot the guy if he's dumb enough to try another grab attempt. But wouldn't it be better if he didn't want to try that second attempt in the first place?

No offense, but your evidence that Lindell is street proven is not convincing. Assertive body language isn't the sole province of Lindell, that's for sure. And I certainly wouldn't call that a successful weapon retention event either. If I did, I'd be having successes with every person I meet on the street. None of them has made a gun grab attempt yet. Must be the secret Ninja system I'm using. Frankly, you made the claim of street proven. But you apparently don't have data to back that up. Anecdotes aren't persuasive either. I call those "war stories".

The problem with a half second delay after securing your gun in the holster is that your "beat" is now secure pause positionrelease. You want to dictate the beat, not let the other guy catch up by pausing. The sequence should be securepositionrelease. It's an immediate action drill with continuous flow.

Here are two easy suggestions for possible changes/improvements. Take them for what they're worth.

Number 1, dispense with the multiple drawn gun retention methods like can opener, corkscrew, nutcracker, and submarine, which depend on the nature of the attack (palm up, palm down, left hand, right hand, one hand, two hands, etc etc). Use a release (mechanical, not dependent on strength) analogous to how some trainers teach long arm retention, that is circle the long arm to create a wrist lock which compromises the attacker's grip. You can achieve the same thing for handgun retention, regardless of whether the attack is 1-handed or 2-handed, to the gun or to the arm/wrist, palm up or palm down. Suck the gun into your center (reverse drawstroke) while moving forward off the line of force. Get your forearms parallel to the front of your torso (elbows out like wings). Roll your wrist/gun over the offending limb to produce the release. The pivot
point for the roll is at the gun. Essentially, you are executing Thai elbow strike movements. Upper torso torque aids in the mechanical release. You can string alternating left and right side rolls. I believe this circling movement is also similar to what some use as a substitute for submarine. The arm position is different and you aren't driving the gun into the grabber for additional pain compliance (although perhaps you could).

The benefits are elimination of multiple techniques, integration with your (reverse) drawstroke, integration with movement off the line of force, integration with DT techniques (common elbow strikes), muzzle kept pointed
at the attacker.

Number 2, get rid of the left hand vs. right hand disarm techniques for attacks from the rear. Aikido wrist locks work fine regardless of handedness. Turn just one way. I suggest turning such that your strongside holstered weapon is always away from the attacker. Again, that integrates
with DT (keep the your weapon on the outside of the circle), eliminates extra moves, and is non-diagnostic (you don't have to take a peek to guess which hand the gun is in).

WH

[Spectre]

WH,

What you are suggesting sounds very similar to techniques I...um...learned in a secret Ninja school. Seriously, while agreeing that a complicated manual of movements may not well serve the average street officer, I disagree that this sole series of movements will adequately cover the gamut of disarmament attempts that could be mounted against an officer. Again, if I understand the technique you are suggesting, it works best against a static grab; it does not work nearly as well if the attacker is moving forcefully forward or backward, while keeping a good "feel" on the gun wielder's wrist.

I am of the belief that a play for your firearm is a deadly threat, and so (to use others' terms) "destructive" tactics are just fine.

[heisenberg]

Spectre, trust me when I say that I was not proposing to devise a new, complete system in 5 minutes.

Even if the release method I described works only against static attacks, it still greatly reduces the number of retention moves you need to remember and select from. And, I believe there is potentially much better integration with DT and firearms.

Also remember that bad/static grab attempts can quickly turn into aggressive/successful ones if you don't do something ASAP.

But in my opinion, the release method I described can work against fairly agressive wrist/gun grabs (at least in some of the FIST suit experiments I've tried). As with most self-defense techniques, best effectiveness occurs if you are aware and have a chance to act before the opponent really gets locked into his attack and you can move off the line of force. So the fact that someone is closing on you aggressively is not necessarily a problem, as long as you aren't taken by surprise and the guy is on you before you've even woken up to the fact you've been targeted. Since this is a drawn handgun retention method, I would hope that you are aware and not sleeping on the job!

If you do get bowled over by surprise, at least you still have two hands on your gun. You also still can execute the same circling release movement on the ground as well (but unfortunately probably with less torso torque and certainly without the benefit of dropping your center of gravity).
Try using can opener or nutcracker on the ground!

In fact, you probably can use the circling movement as part of the common martial arts ground escape from the mount. Presumably the attackers hands are already occupied by trying to take your gun. So his weight is probably well
forward. He has only his legs as a base. This should be very easy to buck him right off of you. Simultaneously roll to remove his hands from your gun.

Note that the standing release movement puts you in perfect position to deliver a followup elbow spear to the attacker. Your torso is cocked, your center of gravity is down, and your elbow is already in position. You just need to shuffle forward, raise up, and jab.

Also note that the upper torso torque and dropping of the center of gravity during the release itself all combine to aid the mechanical release.

If you see the charge coming in time, you can reverse drawstroke to retention and deliver a rising Thai elbow. That works to keep the opponent from ever getting near your drawn gun. This technique works for small people against large people. Again, I've used this in FIST suit experiments against opponents outweighing me by over 100 lbs. The attacker's forward direction adds power to your strike. You don't even have to actually strike. He spears himself. The key again is to step off the line of force, get into an aggressive braced stance, and deliver the Thai elbow.

None of this stuff is revolutionary or original. They all come from martial arts techniques that have been around for ages. The trick is merging empty hand techniques with firearms requirements, and also getting out of the classic martial arts mindset of having a specific, optimized move for every conceivable attack.

WH

[Spectre]

Some of these things are hard to visualize. I would also postulate that grappling actions taken against FIST-clad attackers are likely to be more effective because of the enforced rigidity of the suit.

I really agree with this:getting out of the classic martial arts mindset of having a specific, optimized move for every conceivable attack.

In the budo lineages I study, the goal is really to teach one's body how to move, instead of rote responses to attacks. There always seems to be *something* that pops up in real life that one could not have predicted. Learning to stay aware, and having taught one's body how to respond should carry the day.